|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Dec 7, 2006 14:43:39 GMT -5
" Dignity Village" In the days before Christmas of 2000, a group of homeless people in Portland, Oregon succeeded in establishing a shanty town which garnered a great deal of both opposition and support, and quickly evolved from a group of self-described "outsiders" who practiced civil disobedience, to a self-regulating, city-recognized "campground" as defined by Portland city code. Now featuring elected community officials and crude but functional cooking, social, electric, and sanitary facilities, Dignity Village got its start as a collection of tents and campers "squatting" illegally on unused public land near Downtown Portland. They had very little in the way of traditional political voice, but they did have a message to deliver about how they perceived the homeless in Portland are treated, and that message ultimately resonated in the Portland community and the halls of city government. Initially confronted by police for their unlicensed use of public land, the initial group of eight men and women had the benefit of a forceful voice in the person of homeless activist Jack Tafari, and the early support of a few local politicians and associated coverage in the local media. The Portland police department eventually realized that the group, then calling themselves Camp Dignity, was engaged in complicated Constitutional issues of redress of grievance, and deferred the political issue to the local political authority: The Portland City Council and Mayor. Once established in the gray area of political speech, the fortunes of Dignity Village increased and picked up significant media coverage and popular support... ? could this be a model for anarchists? i.e. a so-called "Intentional Community, but of course with less socialism-sounding principles? :-\ |
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Dec 7, 2006 15:41:27 GMT -5
Ya know, I mentioned a community on the California coast sometime ago in a post on the Property Rights thread. In this community they seem to have a unique way of dealing with political issues and that is by consensus. They will not enact any rules unless they have total consensus. At the time I made the post, I do believe I got a lot of ridicule about it (which is fine), but it continues bouncing around in my head.
Lately I've come to think that there is much more to this than I had thought before. I still believe that the idea of Private Property has much benefit to it, but at the same time I also feel that it is not the be-all-end-all that libertarians frequently see it as. There will always be issues of communal space, I do believe. With that in mind, the "consensus" idea seems to answer the problems inherent in group ownership or control. By not passing a rule unless ALL of the community members agree to it, you have removed the problem of coercive rule by the majority.
Private Property where appropriate, Total Consensus rule elsewhere. Hmm.
Thoughts?
(and please forgive me and chastise me if I'm co-opting this thread, that's not my intent, it is just that Darren's post about Portland triggered these thoughts...)
- NonE
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Dec 7, 2006 16:13:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Dec 7, 2006 16:34:24 GMT -5
Thanks, Darien!
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Dec 7, 2006 17:26:27 GMT -5
No problem, NonI!
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Dec 13, 2006 17:48:16 GMT -5
" Whuffie is the ephemeral, reputation-based currency of Cory Doctorow's sci-fi novel, Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom. This future history book describes a post-scarcity economy: All the necessities (and most of the luxuries) of life are free for the taking. A person's current Whuffie is instantly viewable to anyone, as everybody has a brain-implant giving them an interface with the Net. The usual economic incentives have disappeared from the book's world. Whuffie has replaced money, providing a motivation for people to do useful and creative things. A person's Whuffie is a general measurement of his or her overall reputation, and Whuffie is lost and gained according to a person's favorable or unfavorable actions. The question is, who determines which actions are favorable or unfavorable? In Down and Out, the answer is public opinion. Rudely pushing past someone on the sidewalk will definitely lose you points from them (and possibly bystanders who saw you), while composing a much-loved symphony will earn you Whuffie from everyone who enjoyed it. "  Has anyone here read this book yet? Apparently the eBook version of it is free online with the Creative Commons license (which allows for not only free distributions, but also fan-fic derivative works  ) (!wow!) " Bitchun.org runs on open source code (still in alpha release), creating a marketplace for trading and rewarding favors for your friends and like-minded strangers. It’s pretty amazing to have something I invented for a science fiction novel turned into running code!" (from the site: "Find people who share your interests and can help. Help others and earn respect. See how much whuffie is earned by you and your friends."  ...see also this page.) <-- I think this was previously known as " The Yap Society" , IIRC mentioned in this or a similar thread some time ago? |
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Dec 13, 2006 20:19:37 GMT -5
At the time I made the post, I do believe I got a lot of ridicule about it (which is fine), but it continues bouncing around in my head. let me go on record as saying it deserves not ridicule, but accolades! I feel there's a lot to be found valuable in calling for consensus before any enactment! |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Apr 23, 2007 14:20:53 GMT -5
Mohawks raise spectre of another protestA spokesman for the Tyendinaga Mohawks near Napanee, Ont., vowed yesterday to stage another protest within 30 days similar to the railway blockade that halted passenger and freight trains running across Eastern Ontario. The Mohawks peacefully removed their railway blockade ahead of schedule on Saturday morning, ending a standoff with police and freeing up trains. The blockade's removal meant the re-start of railway traffic on the busy Toronto-Montreal corridor late on Saturday morning. Passenger trains were running as scheduled by the afternoon, though with delays from anywhere between 40 minutes to two hours. Shawn Brant, a blockade leader, said that other economic targets were being eyed by those protesting land issues in the Bay of Quinte region. " We wanted to show [the government] that we were serious and we don't feel they should be questioning our resolve in dealing with this matter because we will act on the next target," he said yesterday. A community meeting on Friday raised concerns about the potential for violence. Residents were also worried the federal government would walk away from land negotiations if the blockade continued, Mr. Brant said. The barriers came down peacefully at about 6 a.m. -- 18 hours earlier then the group had planned. There were no arrests, according to the Ontario Provincial Police. "We went in on a consensus basis and we discussed it, and we reduced our time from 48 hours to 30 hours in order that we could come out together," Mr. Brant said. "It wasn't the result of a gun to our head." They were protesting a proposed condominium development on the Culbertson Tract, a 375-hectare area claimed by the Mohawks, along with a controversial gravel quarry nearby. Mr. Brant had also alluded to the one-year anniversary of the Caledonia standoff and the recent suspension of Tyendinaga's police chief for alleged racist comments about the RCMP he made to a local newspaper. Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice told CBC News Saturday there was "no excuse" for the blockade, which would hamper public support for the Mohawk land claims and hurt the negotiation process. The blockade, which began at midnight on Friday with a burnt out school bus, closed the double track CN line at Deseronto Road, a rural road dividing Napanee and Tyendinaga Townships. A court injunction to "cease and desist" was ignored. Meanwhile, the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP) is planning to lead a protest today at Queen's Park in support of the Tyendinaga Mohawks. - - - I'm not saying I agree with the Mohawks' claim, nor their tactics. It's just nice to see (inpsiring!) what can happen when more than just a single individual stands up to the "guns" and refuses to "obey" court injunction that order them to stop defending what they believe to be their rights... Imagine if hundreds, even thousands of alleged-taxpayers simply stood on the steps of their local "hallowed halls of justice" and held up signs that said "prove to me with facts that I am a taxpayer and/or that I have an actual obligation to file ANYTHING..." etc. Methinks that would get more press coverage than the occasional "lone wolf" who gets convicted in kangaroo court...
|
|
)
...see also